Joozz
09-19 04:45 PM
Hi guys,
Is there anyway somebody can give me an advice what to do?
My first H1B was issued in December 2000, then I changed employer 2 times and joined my current company in January of 2005. My current employer got my visa transferred and new visa was issued till April 2006. In March my employer sent another petition for H1B extension and this petition was approved in June 2006 and it says its valid till October 2008. It means totally I can stay on H1B almost 8 years? It seems to me its some sort of clerical mistake and I am not sure that I do not violate any immigration law staying here.
Here is another thing that confuses me even more. My current employer started my GC on EB3 though. In January 2006 the employer filed I140 that has been approved May 15 2006. Even though, we did not file any additional requests (I heard I can extend H1B for 3 years with approved 140) I am wondering if USCIS figured it by themselves when they were approving my H1B petition.
Recently I have got decent job offer from another employer that willing to transfer my H1B and start my GC from the beginning. Will it be a huge risk to accept this job offer?
I am sorry for asking it here. We do not have a layer for GC procedure. I was trying to find one that can clarify my situation but layers who I found did not want to give me a legal advice even I was ready to pay for it. They were demanding $1000 retainer prior any work done.
Thanks in advance.
Is there anyway somebody can give me an advice what to do?
My first H1B was issued in December 2000, then I changed employer 2 times and joined my current company in January of 2005. My current employer got my visa transferred and new visa was issued till April 2006. In March my employer sent another petition for H1B extension and this petition was approved in June 2006 and it says its valid till October 2008. It means totally I can stay on H1B almost 8 years? It seems to me its some sort of clerical mistake and I am not sure that I do not violate any immigration law staying here.
Here is another thing that confuses me even more. My current employer started my GC on EB3 though. In January 2006 the employer filed I140 that has been approved May 15 2006. Even though, we did not file any additional requests (I heard I can extend H1B for 3 years with approved 140) I am wondering if USCIS figured it by themselves when they were approving my H1B petition.
Recently I have got decent job offer from another employer that willing to transfer my H1B and start my GC from the beginning. Will it be a huge risk to accept this job offer?
I am sorry for asking it here. We do not have a layer for GC procedure. I was trying to find one that can clarify my situation but layers who I found did not want to give me a legal advice even I was ready to pay for it. They were demanding $1000 retainer prior any work done.
Thanks in advance.
chris
02-05 02:10 PM
Our cases are assigned to IO more that 60 days ago. No LUD's sofar.
Called VSC, One officer told me that they have thousands of cases pending. :confused:
Any one got GC recently and pending with IO more that 60 days ?
Appricaite comments and advice.
Called VSC, One officer told me that they have thousands of cases pending. :confused:
Any one got GC recently and pending with IO more that 60 days ?
Appricaite comments and advice.
.jpg "cute i love you quotes. cute i")
konga1978
01-22 10:34 AM
Hi friends,
I live in weston (south florida). This thread is effort to gather as many as we can from south florida, help and bring awarness regarding Green Card processing to make things work faster.
Cheers,
Naveen
I live in weston (south florida). This thread is effort to gather as many as we can from south florida, help and bring awarness regarding Green Card processing to make things work faster.
Cheers,
Naveen
desi3933
02-18 06:39 PM
If you could post some official documentation that would help rajesh1972
If the child is under 2 years old, and is accompanied by LPR parent upon their first return to the U.S. of the parent who is applying to re-enter as LPR and the parent is admissible, then the child should be issued an I-181 upon his/her first entry as a lawful permanent resident.
I-181 (Memorandum of Creation of Record of Lawful Permanent Residence)
I will get official links for that. It is recommended that LPR parent has travel document that allows LPR to be outside US for upto 2 years and preserve green card status.
**** Not a legal advise ***
If the child is under 2 years old, and is accompanied by LPR parent upon their first return to the U.S. of the parent who is applying to re-enter as LPR and the parent is admissible, then the child should be issued an I-181 upon his/her first entry as a lawful permanent resident.
I-181 (Memorandum of Creation of Record of Lawful Permanent Residence)
I will get official links for that. It is recommended that LPR parent has travel document that allows LPR to be outside US for upto 2 years and preserve green card status.
**** Not a legal advise ***
more...
bmoni
12-21 09:34 AM
We have Missouri State Chapter. Please check the state chapters section. show your support. I like the idea of midwest Conference call. I will be dialing in.
eb3_nepa
04-27 06:13 PM
Apologise for 2 threads on the same thing. Tried going back and modifying the text a little bit, only to create a new thread.
more...
ARUNRAMANATHAN
06-11 01:54 PM
I am in my 8 yr. Have a H1-B approved Untill 2008 Dec
Have a EB3 Approved Labor and 140 from Company A.
Now as of today if I move to Company B ...
Question :
Can I get a 3 yr Extension based on Company A (140 Approved )
that is from june 2007 to june 2010
OR
Do I get my H1-B untill 2008 Dec ?
----
When I move to Company B is there anything that I have be aware off as
I am planning to pally Eb2 and move the PD from company A
My PD : EB3 Jun 2004
Thanks Thanks Thanks Thanks
Have a EB3 Approved Labor and 140 from Company A.
Now as of today if I move to Company B ...
Question :
Can I get a 3 yr Extension based on Company A (140 Approved )
that is from june 2007 to june 2010
OR
Do I get my H1-B untill 2008 Dec ?
----
When I move to Company B is there anything that I have be aware off as
I am planning to pally Eb2 and move the PD from company A
My PD : EB3 Jun 2004
Thanks Thanks Thanks Thanks
dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
more...
wooster
07-09 09:52 PM
I had the same thing happen to me, applied PP on June19, it reached on 20th got approved on June21. Status still shows pending, but the lawyer got the approval notice with an A# to boot...
ronhira
06-10 11:17 PM
Why do people write "I support" or "I oppose". Is there a voting going on here. What does "I support" actually mean? I am just trying to understand. r u guys going to do something more after writing "I support"? Just asking
more...
nkd970
10-06 09:56 PM
Are there any new updates? My case was filed in Jun 07, responded to the query in NOV 07, and it is still pending?
What the &*^% is going on? !!@$%ing DOL.
:mad:
Mine was filed by Fragomen in June and responded to audit in November as well. If your case was filed by Fragomen you have no option but the wait. Sorry to disappoint you, but I am in exactly the same situation.
What the &*^% is going on? !!@$%ing DOL.
:mad:
Mine was filed by Fragomen in June and responded to audit in November as well. If your case was filed by Fragomen you have no option but the wait. Sorry to disappoint you, but I am in exactly the same situation.
bestofall
07-31 03:41 PM
is any one interested for Coor pool / Charter Bus for DC rally ?
May be we should work on that way ..
If any one ..pls PM me
May be we should work on that way ..
If any one ..pls PM me
more...
eb3_nepa
05-14 01:44 PM
Point taken.
I did look under the visa bulletin section of the forums, I did not see anything on pages 1 and 2 so I posted.
But, point taken.
Mocking me so much shows you in bad taste, my friends.
This is the last thing you will see me posting here.
And it is a "her".
You lied! ;). You posted one more time.
Fortunately or unfortunately on this forum, saying this is your last post doesnt make people become nicer to you :)
I did look under the visa bulletin section of the forums, I did not see anything on pages 1 and 2 so I posted.
But, point taken.
Mocking me so much shows you in bad taste, my friends.
This is the last thing you will see me posting here.
And it is a "her".
You lied! ;). You posted one more time.
Fortunately or unfortunately on this forum, saying this is your last post doesnt make people become nicer to you :)
msp1976
02-15 11:33 AM
How about requesting a $1donation when a non-contributing member ask a question, or $5 dollars for ten posts.It is not much but will definitely bring some revenue.
We can have a forum like member only access...where the question can only be posted by payed members or by people who pay a small donation? The idea is that the amount requested is not much ,which anyone can afford, but the number of questions people ask on our forum will definitely generate some revenue.
We can start a volunteer thread as a pilot program to see what kind of response we get...what do Core and rest of the member think of it?
Some of us have a fair study of the immigration laws....Our knowledge is anecdotal.....but still we are not lawyers and we donot want to get into a situation in which we get sued for providing potentially incorrect info....No one wants to mislead anyone but accepting money for service makes us step into an unknown territory....
We want to educate members as much as possible but this is not core business...
All advice we provide is with a caveat that users should check with their lawyesr for feasibility....
We can have a forum like member only access...where the question can only be posted by payed members or by people who pay a small donation? The idea is that the amount requested is not much ,which anyone can afford, but the number of questions people ask on our forum will definitely generate some revenue.
We can start a volunteer thread as a pilot program to see what kind of response we get...what do Core and rest of the member think of it?
Some of us have a fair study of the immigration laws....Our knowledge is anecdotal.....but still we are not lawyers and we donot want to get into a situation in which we get sued for providing potentially incorrect info....No one wants to mislead anyone but accepting money for service makes us step into an unknown territory....
We want to educate members as much as possible but this is not core business...
All advice we provide is with a caveat that users should check with their lawyesr for feasibility....
more...
eb3_nepa
04-13 11:19 AM
I was reading this article.
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_law.html.
It's a great article and maybe we shud add it in our FAQ section.
If you scroll down to the heading "The Bill Becomes Law"
it says :
Officially, after the President signs the bill, 10 days passes without a signature, or after a veto override, the bill is considered law. It is in effect at that moment. But in reality, it is, of course, more difficult than that.
Even on the Wikipedia article listed in the FAQ there was no mention of a 90 day delay. Just wondering if Sen Sessions simply asked for a 90 day delay or a 180 day delay.
Check this out too.
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/lawsmade.bysec/presidential.html
"A bill becomes law on the date of approval or passage over the President's veto, unless it expressly provides a different effective date."
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_law.html.
It's a great article and maybe we shud add it in our FAQ section.
If you scroll down to the heading "The Bill Becomes Law"
it says :
Officially, after the President signs the bill, 10 days passes without a signature, or after a veto override, the bill is considered law. It is in effect at that moment. But in reality, it is, of course, more difficult than that.
Even on the Wikipedia article listed in the FAQ there was no mention of a 90 day delay. Just wondering if Sen Sessions simply asked for a 90 day delay or a 180 day delay.
Check this out too.
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/lawsmade.bysec/presidential.html
"A bill becomes law on the date of approval or passage over the President's veto, unless it expressly provides a different effective date."
slc_ut
05-28 05:31 PM
I am planning to take visa appointment in Chennai consulate for my 8th year H-1B extension and my wife's H-4. When i checked the vfs website yesterday, dates were open for last week of Sep'2006. Today it is already showing only dates in Nov'2006 as open dates. Howcome Oct'2006 dates never showed up. Were the appointments finished that fast for Oct'2006 ? Any other members who observed this, please post your thoughts.
more...
thomachan72
07-20 03:14 PM
the link does not work. pls check
ujjwal_p
03-26 03:40 PM
just listen to the show - wonderful performance - you were crisp and to the point ... your points on this EB mess and the closing comments were great ... the 2nd caller shows the typical American common man mentality towards EB community ...
First of all, Mark: Great job ! I think this was a great spokesperson job for our issue. I think the biggest problem facing our issue is lack of awareness. I disagree with sammyb's comment. I don't think the 2nd caller shows the typical american mentailty towards *our* issue. Any talk about immigration, be it legal or illegal, gets overtaken with the bigger illegal immigration debate. And that is natural given the scale of illegal immigration problem when compared to the legal one. I think Mark gave a great response to the 2nd caller by giving perspective. Until there is more awareness about the *legal* immigration issues and a separation from the larger illegal immigration debate, this will be a tough battle.
On the face of it, this shouldn't be hard. People who follow the rules and the majority of them being tremendous assets to the American economy. Just the kind of immigrants a country would want : educated (in quite a few cases highly), skillful , law abiding and language proficient. Yet, here we are.
First of all, Mark: Great job ! I think this was a great spokesperson job for our issue. I think the biggest problem facing our issue is lack of awareness. I disagree with sammyb's comment. I don't think the 2nd caller shows the typical american mentailty towards *our* issue. Any talk about immigration, be it legal or illegal, gets overtaken with the bigger illegal immigration debate. And that is natural given the scale of illegal immigration problem when compared to the legal one. I think Mark gave a great response to the 2nd caller by giving perspective. Until there is more awareness about the *legal* immigration issues and a separation from the larger illegal immigration debate, this will be a tough battle.
On the face of it, this shouldn't be hard. People who follow the rules and the majority of them being tremendous assets to the American economy. Just the kind of immigrants a country would want : educated (in quite a few cases highly), skillful , law abiding and language proficient. Yet, here we are.
pappu
12-19 06:46 PM
core member- Ashish Sharma (eager2i) will be attending this call on behalf of the core team.
gctoget
09-10 06:08 PM
Placed a google order for $100
Google Order #570596617489866
Google Order #570596617489866
tonyHK12
02-03 07:52 PM
Congratulations
No comments:
Post a Comment